Sixteen marketing associations, some of which are backed by Facebook Inc and Alphabet Inc’s Google, faulted Apple for not adhering to an ad-industry system for seeking user consent under European privacy rules. Apps will now need to ask for permission twice, increasing the risk users will refuse, the associations argued.
Cry me a river.
There’s an interesting note later in the linked article:
Apple engineers also said last week the company will bolster a free Apple-made tool that uses anonymous, aggregated data to measure whether advertising campaigns are working and that will not trigger the pop-up.
But of course it doesn’t. It’s made by Apple, after all, and we all trust Apple, right? It’s not like Apple rushed to sell out everything privacy-related to a regime committing genocide, so we clearly have nothing to worry about when Apple forces itself into the advertising business by leveraging its iOS platform.
> It’s not like Apple rushed to sell out everything privacy-related to a regime committing genocide, so we clearly have nothing to worry about when Apple forces itself into the advertising business by leveraging its iOS platform.
Like clockwork.
Thom, I agree with this point, but if you’re going to post such editorial notes you apply the same acerbic tone to to every computer company mentioned in any OSNews post. Otherwise it doesn’t sound like you’re actually standing up for Chinese freedom as much as you’re just using it as an excuse to dump on Apple.
Thom can speak for himself of course, but it seems a strange accusation when there’s a dig at Facebook and Google just a couple of paragraphs up in the same post. A quick search of the archives for topics related to China shows articles complaining about Google, Blizzard, IBM and others. One of them finishes with this:
All I’m saying is that Thom’s ire doesn’t seem exclusively directed at Apple to me.
Agreed, it was a balanced post. I’ll call it out as quick as anyone if I think an editorial is biased.
The standard Apple legal defence calling for parity is starting to wear very thin, they are it seems a tower of exclusivity.
The irony of Apple becoming the very thing that it claims to rally against is not lost on most people, and defending Apple without proper regard to it’s actions and behaviour is becoming a leaky vessel. What Apple, and many other corporations say, is greatly diminished by what they do, we can see that, we do not need it explained by a marketing department.
> All I’m saying is that Thom’s ire doesn’t seem exclusively directed at Apple to me.
But how are We now supposed to feel offended and justified in our outrage while posting teary eyed from our mighty trendier than thou MPB keyboards?!
I am under the impression that Thom criticizes Apple definitely more than Google and the others.
syngularyx,
I don’t feel there’s more criticism directed at apple, I just think apple just gets more coverage for better or worse. In the past I’ve suggested a quota because the dominance of a handful of companies in the news gets tiresome, but that’s wishful thinking on my part. Consolidation is the future.